Posted by
Eddie Siqueira
- Tuesday, April 1, 2014
John Frusciante's new album Enclosure was released (literally) into the stratosphere on March 29, 2014 on board the "experimental" interorbital satellite Sat-JF14. The album is transmitted to an app, which plays back its music directly onto your phone or iTunes—provided the satellite is somewhere above your head, until it goes around the other side of the globe again. As of Monday, March 31, you can download this app, called Sat-JF14.
I wish I had something more fantastic to say other than "neat." I totally dig this idea, but I can't help but fear a looming April fool's joke in there somewhere… especially after the hoverboard thing. Then again, if logic serves me, smartphones get their data from satellites, and the app does stream it from somewhere, so it's not impossible. Who knows what airspace laws were bent to send a single satellite into space with the sole purpose of streaming music (which will do so for only a little less than a week).
 |
| This app is for real, called Sat-JF14 |
Regardless, this is excellent publicity for the genius six-stringer. Some online comments already call him pretentious, but whatever, man. With his guitar skills and musical talent, he can be the first man on Mars for all I care and that would still be justified. That's ridiculous though: everyone knows the human race came from Mars.
Let's hope we get to see some other killer creative album releases. We've come a long way from artists giving it away for free like Nine Inch Nails's The Slip in 2008 or Radiohead's 2007 release In Rainbows, which allowed fans to pay what they wanted to obtain the album. In both instances, the albums did great.
Oh, almost forgot: Frusciante's album officially releases on April 8. I'll be hearing Enclosure real soon, for sure. Big fan here! So, what do you guys think of this musical spaceman stunt? Love it or hate it? Comment!
 |
| Sat-JF14 being launched in the Mojave desert. Where will it land? |
Posted by
Fellonius Munch
Word has it that Sigourney Weaver has joined the cast of Prometheus 2, teaming her with producer and director Ridley Scott once again, thirty five years after Scott introduced her to audiences everywhere as Warrant Officer Ellen Ripley. Oh, and did I mention that she'll be playing…Ripley? Just gonna give you a moment to get over your nerdgasms, right there.
 |
| Even holding him at raygun-point couldn't guarantee a smile. |
Okay, finished?
What hasn't been fully revealed or cleared up since Scott delved back into the Alien universe two years ago is whether this whole new franchise really is set before the events of Alien or afterward. Well, judging from our sources, Weaver will be portraying a future clone of Ripley, and we don't yet know if she'll be a lead player alongside Noomi Rapace and Michael Fassbender or if she'll just provide us with a cameo.
 |
| "...and then I said, no lad, I'm just big boned!" |
Apparently the studio wanted to maximize the success of the sequel after Prometheus left many original fans a little sour. So if this news is just an April Fool's prank, whoever thought this was a bright idea just destroyed any hopes of anyone being interested at all. Additionally, I might just hunt them down to the edges of the Earth and punch them right in the testicles, repeatedly. If they don't have testicles, I'll punch them in the arse repeatedly instead, until they can't sit down ever again!
However, IMDb also confirms the addition of actor Danny Webb. Any clues? Adding weight to the theory that Prometheus may actually be a sequel to the Alien quadrilogy, Danny will be playing a certain character named Morse. You may remember that Morse was the only surviving prisoner of Fiorina "Fury" 161, escorted away Weyland-Yutani troops at the end of Alien 3.
 |
| "MY JAM SANDWICH! IT JUST EXPLODED!" |
I like the idea that Prometheus could be a sequel as opposed to a prequel, simply for the fact that no sci-fi prequel should ever be more technically or humanly advanced than that which it claims to precede. I like the idea of Sigourney Weaver returning to the character and the fictional universe that she made so memorable, even at the age of 64. Simply put, she's still got it and we Alien fans still want it!
 |
| "Do I like it kinky? Ummm, I gave birth to an alien..." |
Sound off, Fanboys! What do you make of this news? Feel free to leave your comments below and thanks for reading.
Posted by
Anthony Mango
- Monday, March 31, 2014
After nine seasons, it's finally time for Ted Mosby to meet The Mother in the How I Met Your Mother series finale two-part episode, entitled "Last Forever."
This has been an odd show built around the premise that we already know what happens: Ted meets The Mother and they have two children together. How Ted gets to that point, however, has always been a mystery to the audience. Tonight, that mystery is solved and the story comes to an end.
Yesterday, we had a special podcast retrospective of the show in which we discussed our theories on what is going to happen, what we'd like to see, and reminisced about our favorite moments as fans. Give it a listen! Is The Mother dead, or is that just a red herring?
LAST FOREVER REVIEW
Let me be blunt here: my gut reaction is to be mad. Throughout this entire series, I've been hoping that they would stick to their guns and Ted would not end up with Robin. Little did we all know that they were in fact sticking to their guns, but that that WAS their original plan.
It's disappointing, and I feel like they even admitted why: The Mother is barely in the story. Ted really just spent all that time talking about some other woman instead of their mother. How does that make Ted Mosby anything but LESS likable than before?
It's obviously not their intention, but it really comes off as though Ted's relationship with Tracy wasn't actually the love of his life. She was just another bump in the road like Stella and Zoey and Victoria to fill the void. She was a means to an end for him to have kids and after that was done, she was no longer useful.
Again, while I'm writing this out, let me remind you that this is my initial gut reaction to something I've waited nine years to see, so my opinions might change on this later, and right now, ten minutes have gone by and I'm already less angry and more disappointed.
I liked how the episode started with a flashback to the origins of the group, but immediately it started to make me think that this was just another sign that they were making Robin too integral.
I'll give credit to Carter Bays and Craig Thomas that they did stay true to the idea that this might be fictional, but it doesn't mean everything is a fairy tale. Barney and Robin getting a divorce? That happens in real life. The likelihood that we would have three perfect couples in Lily/Marshall, Barney/Robin, Ted/Tracy that all live happily ever after and play bridge on the front porch was probably not going to happen.
But damn it, why did this have to turn out to be a series about how Ted was still in love with Robin throughout everything? I know that it would be even more depressing if Tracy died and there was nobody there for Ted, but doesn't this just make you think that Ted only loved Tracy as much as he allowed himself to be deluded into thinking? He thought he loved Zoey, he thought he loved Victoria, he thought he loved Stella, he even thought people like Leilani were "the one." So what's the difference with Tracy? There were more clues about destiny than the others?
A friend of mine brought up a great point. He said it's as if they completely glossed over Tracy and said to the audience "what did she die from? Who cares." And then the kids basically have the reaction of "Dad, our mom has been dead for like, six years, just get over it already." Ouch. Also, why don't we even get a name for Barney's daughter's mother? I liked the idea that his daughter was the true love of his life, but her mother doesn't matter either?
I'm glad that they at least tried to tie up some loose ends, like Marshall paying Lily after losing the bet, but he technically didn't now, did he? And why was there no explanation about Bob Saget's voice?
It's going to take a long time for me to process this and I'm sure I'll be easier on it in the future, but if I'm giving an honest initial reaction to it, I can't help but be disappointed that for a show that has meant so much to me over the years, built upon the concept of receiving a payoff, it all ended up being kind of tossed aside for a Ted and Robin ship. Ted was supposed to be telling us the best love story that ever existed: the story of how he met Tracy. Not the story of how he always had a thing for Robin and now that his wife is dead, it's supposed to be justified for him to go after her for the millionth time.
WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER'S FINALE?
LEAVE US A COMMENT BELOW!
Posted by
The Dace Man
- Sunday, March 30, 2014
Hey, hey, hey, Dacetacular Nation! Chris Dace is back, bringing you a diamond in the rough that's circulating on the Internet.
With the upcoming finale of How I Met Your Mother, set for Monday, March 31, it's no surprise that that the entire cast would sit down with James Lipton on Inside The Actors Studio. That's when we got a duet from actors Jason Segel and Neil Patrick Harris.
All it took was a question from an aspiring actor in the audience about the pair's extemporaneous 2005 performance of "The Confrontation" from Les Miserables, and a reminder from Alyson Hannigan that "We haven't heard that in a long time." After Jason Segel asked who would claim which role, Neil Patrick Harris—as only he can do—started to sing. This drew Segel into the song, and the two were off, giving us one last legendary memory with the entire cast. Check it out below, and make sure you catch the Fanboys Anonymous retrospective on How I Met Your Mother, only on Mega Powers Radio!
As always, check back regularly to see what Chris "The Dace Man" Dace is looking at (and no, not just porn) as well as all of the other bloggers here at Fanboys Anonymous. Remember, keyboard warriors: leave your feedback! Until the next time, for the few, the proud, and, of course, the Dacetacular, grab a beer—and in this case a French pineapple!—and check out what's going on here in the Dace-Sphere. See ya next time!
Posted by
Sarrah October Young
What began as a chance encounter during an essay assignment has turned into a full-blown reincarnation of what could possibly be the first female superhero. Move over Wonder Woman; Nelvana of the Northern Lights is back, and she's ready to kick some ass—in a nice Canadian way.
Hope Nicholson is no stranger to comics or superheroes. A self-proclaimed nerd, Nicholson is extremely passionate about Canada's Golden Age of Comics and has produced a documentary outlining the era. Aptly titled Lost Heroes, the doc features the history of Canadian superheroes and their creators. Among them is the legendary Adrian Dingle, the man behind Nelvana of the Northern Lights. She stumbled upon the female superhero while researching a paper for her BA program and, despite the lack of information around Nelvana, the character immediately resonated with her.
"I never actually had access to read any of her stories for the first few years after I heard about Nelvana," Nicholson explains. "It was more her history and place in history that fascinated me. The stories themselves are fairly good for their time, but it's really their failed potential that caught my attention."
When she decided to take a stab at collecting and reprinting the Nelvana comics, she did so with the blessing of the original copyright holders whom she'd had the opportunity to get to know while filming her documentary. They granted Nicholson and her partner, Rachel Richey, exclusive rights to reprint Nelvana. The two then put together a fantastic Kickstarter campaign (now closed) that not only provided the means to collect/scan the comics and reprint them but also allowed the partners to commission art pieces from local and internationally acclaimed artists for inclusion in the book.
So exactly how difficult is it to resurrect an almost forgotten Canadian female superhero? Nicholson and Richey have had to jump through a few hoops in order to procure the pages needed for reprinting. "In most cases, we've had to physically travel to private collections or ask for submissions," Nicholson says.
Only one private collector allowed us to take issues home to scan. We did have to skip the Library and Archives vast collection though, as their digitization procedures were either too expensive for our budget if we allowed them to do it, or not high-quality enough for our purposes if they allowed us to do it (photographs, no flash, from several feet away). There were a few collectors that turned us down or didn't get back to us, and in one case, regretfully informed us that they would have loved to help but had recently sold off their entire collection.
While a great many people were enthusiastic about the project, there were a few who had some doubts. Nicholson defends her decision to reprint an almost unknown superhero and understands why some people might not grasp why she would undertake this project. "There was some resistance to resurrecting the comics, mostly from people who were surprised to see that anyone would be interested in spending the time to do this."
Devoting time to source the long-forgotten comics was precisely what Nicholson and Richey did. Not all the comics were found, and Nicholson knew they would need to have an alternative in mind if they wanted to see the project through to completion.
I wasn't sure if I would be able to find every issue in decent shape, but had enough back-up plans that I felt it would be a worthwhile leap to make. In the end, there was one issue, #3 that I only found one copy of and it was too delicate to scan, but luckily a 1970s microfiche of this issue was in re-printable condition so I was able to make it work.
Hearing that Nelvana was going to be reprinted, some comic collectors worried that the cost of the rare issues would increase due to the attention drawn to the comics. Nicholson agrees. "It certainly did [raise the cost], with an issue of Nelvana recently selling for $14,000 dollars, when last year it was only 2,000 at most." Not bad for an Inuit demigoddess who has been under the radar for mainstream collectors for almost 75 years.
With Kickstarter backers to placate and an approximate release date of April 2014 for the book, how close is Nelvana to completion? Nicholson is clearly excited, and possibly a little relieved, to say, "We are DONE! I am so glad to officially say that. We are putting the book together and are aiming to submit it to the printers shortly. It should be in my hands in late April/early May when we will begin our mail-outs. The larger retailer release is planned in the fall if all goes according to plan."
Want to get your hands on a copy NOW? Grab yours at conventions, online through the official Nelvana website, and at select comic shops while quantities last. Check with your local retailer to make sure they didn't miss this!
What do you think about Nelvana's resurrection? Are there other long-forgotten titles would you like to see reprinted? Let us know in the comments below! Happy reading!
Posted by
Orion Petitclerc
- Saturday, March 29, 2014
Earlier today on Comic Book Resources, Dynamite Entertainment announced Cullen Bunn's involvement with writing a special issue #0 of its acclaimed The Shadow comic book series based on the popular pulp-era hero. The issue will explore Lamont Cranston/Kent Allard/Ying Ko's, a.k.a. the Shadow, secrets from his past as he confronts a secret society of evil magicians and meets the one and only Harry Houdini.
In an interview with CBR, Bunn mentions his personal connection with the Shadow through his father, who recently passed away, adding an extra special tone to the news. Dynamite CEO and publisher Nick Barrucci also expressed the company's excitement for working with Bunn, who has become a rising star in the industry.
As a fan of Bunn since his work with the late Venom series from Marvel and a budding fan of all things Shadow since recently rewatching the 1994 film with Alec Baldwin (one of my favorite superhero films from that era), I too am extremely excited about the news and look forward to Bunn's take on the Shadow and his interactions with one of the most recognizable names in magic.
Although there is no date yet for the book's publication, how excited are you guys and gals over this news? How bitter do you think the fruit from the weed of magical crime will be? THE SHADOW KNOWS! Drop a comment below about your favorite Shadow stories and geek out with me over the epically campy film.
Posted by
Anonymous
- Friday, March 28, 2014
Movie lovers and legend lovers: recently Titan Books contacted us about reviewing Noah, the novel adaptation of the new film about the legendary biblical story. Noah is the man credited with the re-initiation of human life and the saving of animal life during the great flood that destroyed almost all life on Earth. I'm happy to say it was definitely decent, as far as action and fiction goes, though it was hard for me to relate to. Presumably everyone sees the injustice in human existence, but it would be awfully hard to find sympathy for Noah's cause considering he hardly seems sane most of the time.
Probably more than anything else that stands out about the literary adaptation of the film is the fact that Noah seems to have a tainted idea of justice, unless you take the story of Abraham and Isaac into account. If most of you will remember, Abraham drags Isaac up the mountain intending to sacrifice him simply because the Lord requests it of him. Doing as the Lord tells him, he raises the sacrificial knife and is about to strike it down on Isaac when an angel grabs his arm and stays the knife. It was just a test. Noah's task in this movie and in the Bible, however, is not a test. Apparently, Noah will cause himself to witness anything to harden himself so he can watch his species die off. My issue with it was that there was no "God said…." His actions were strictly based on his interpretation of visions.
From the beginning, Noah seems to favor the four-legged beasts over humans—humans that eat meat, that is. It sort of draws on the idea that man was meant to be an herbivore, but that the nurturing of evil has caused them to crave meat, to explain a small percentage of the violence of man described in the Bible and the reason for the cleansing. He sets out to build an arc to save two of every animal species because of his visions, but with each step he takes, there is a new obstacle. It plays on the well-known name of Cain, giving a man in Cain's future line a bigger part than he played in the Bible. An interesting fact in my own Bible was that Tubal-Cain's proclaiming that if Cain was cursed for killing Abel, surely Tubal-Cain would be cursed tenfold. It adds a unique possibility to the movie: Tubal-Cain's antisocial personality and his survival of the flood. The bible doesn't strictly say that most of this didn't happen.
Interestingly enough, Methuselah's part in this film seems a bit more prominent than it is in the Bible itself. In the original story, his part is mentioned strictly as the next in the bloodline after Enoch, who begat Lamech, who then begat Noah. Depending on what other religious books you've studied, though, or other media interpretations, you might remember Methuselah playing a larger part, having a relationship with Enoch, ministering to the people with Noah to convince them to change their ways, etc. Enoch, Methuselah's father, was so absolutely pure that he simply was taken into Heaven, and in the movie, Methuselah is renowned as a great and legendary warrior—a protector of the fallen angels.
The problem with Methuselah is not the fictional, or possibly even true, account of his wars waged, but the fact that the angels on Earth even exist. Most interpretations of the bible account for giants and great warriors, which are both pointed out whether you consider Methuselah, Tubal-Cain, or both as great warriors. As a young man, I remember reading Genesis and studying it. It is, after all, along with the first few books of the Bible the least realistic and possibly the hardest to gain an understanding of. Some interpretations, though—and the way I grew up understanding it—was that angels took human wives, breeding and creating giants, whom tended to be massive, violent warriors with generally shifty, uncontrollable moods. That understanding led me to almost instantly reject the fantasy of giants being present during the creation of man, which is how the book's author wrote his fantasy interpretation. Personally, though, the story of Methuselah struck me as unique and fun.
Another inconsistency was with Noah's children's ages. The bible places them as already in their hundreds and two-hundreds, while the movie places them in their teens and lower. Aside from that, you won't find enough evidence in the Bible to discount everything that happens in the film. For all I know, it all happened.
The reason for my critique has been this: I recently read many articles with complaints about accuracy. I also read many articles concerning the banning of this film in certain countries. I wouldn't call it historically accurate (as the Bible tells it), but then again, neither would I call the Bible accurate. The news hype and hatred surrounding this film seems unwarranted. In fact, if it didn't so heavily take from a biblical story, I might say it makes a pretty good fantasy piece. In closing, I hate Noah as a person, but I enjoyed the Noah religious fantasy story and I thought it was quite brilliant. There's going to be plenty of action and there's going to be many questionable moments, but this twist from the everyday understanding of the interpretations makes for a definitely great film novelization. Tell me what you think downstairs.
